The Knife: Off Record – 104

This is exactly right. message a vet at any time and schedule a video visit the same day.
Our vets can even prescribe

medication for many ailments and shipping is always free. With Dutch, you'll get more time

with your pets and year-round peace of mind when it comes to their vet care.

This story contains adult content and language. Listener discretion is advised.
Hello, and welcome to The Knife Off Record. I'm Pasia Eaton.
I'm Hannah Smith. On today's episode, we're going to cover the case of Echo Mae Wiles' disappearance.
We're going to reference an interview we did with a retired FBI special agent. We are going to skip recommendations and listener questions this week.
Instead, we are going to ask a very important question. How do you know if someone is lying to you? I mean, this is really something everyone would love to know.

I personally think I'm pretty good at it. Doesn't everybody think that they're good at it? Maybe.
Maybe everybody thinks that. I feel like that's the problem, actually, is everyone thinks they're really good at it.
Like, you could never fool me. Yeah.
It can be a very difficult thing to know if someone is telling you the truth. Yeah.
And, you know, we have been researching this a lot because we recently spoke with a retired FBI agent by the name of Mark Rossi, who's an expert polygraph examiner. Mark was brought in on a case, the disappearance of Echo May Wiles, which actually turned into a murder investigation.
So first, we're just going to talk about polygraphs. And what does someone think of when they think of a polygraph? My mind goes to like people in a basement, someone strapped up to a machine sweating, and then there's like a piece of paper and a machine and like, what do you call that? Like a wire going crazy.
Yes. And an angry person on the other side who's like, you're lying.
And terrible lighting. Always.
Terrible lighting. For me,

I also think of Puppygate. Hannah.
Puppygate? Puppygate. Okay.
So for those who don't know, I've been trying to get Hannah to watch The Real Housewives of Beverly Hills or really any franchise unsuccessfully since we met. Hasn't happened yet.
Hasn't happened. So I'm just going to tell you about Puppygate.

Okay, great.

So Lisa Vanderpump,

who was a cast member

on The Real Housewives of Beverly Hills before leaving the show, she has a dog rescue. And another cast member, Dorit, adopted a dog from that rescue.
Okay, so here's where things get a little murky. The dog was rehomed by Dorit to someone else who then dropped the dog off at a shelter.
So why this is super bad, other than that nobody wants to drop their dog off at a shelter, is that with dog rescue, you're usually signing something in an adoption agreement that says, if anything goes wrong, I'm going to bring you the dog back. That's so that they can make sure that dog never ends up in a shelter again.
So that was the expectation that Dorit would do that if she didn't want the dog. Exactly.
And the dog had, I think, bitten people in her household or shown aggression. And that's why she rehomed the dog to someone she thought was going to keep it.
And so the story gets out that Lucy Applejuice, the dog, was given to a shelter. And it becomes this like highly sensationalized story that points a finger at Dorit for, you know, sort of callously getting rid of this rescue dog.
And the allegation on the show from the other cast members was that Lisa Vanderpump planted the story to get back at Dorit. Oh my gosh, the drama.
The drama. So Lisa, to clear her good name, takes a polygraph test.
So the woman who owns the dog rescue did a lie detector test? She did a lie detector test that she set up and it's on the show and she walks in there and I'm pretty sure she brings her little dog with her. And she sits down, a man asks her a series of questions and she leaves.
And did she pass? She did. She passed with flying colors.
Oh, wow. So as we've now come to learn, this is not what polygraphs actually are, but they actually have a long history and sort of a complicated public perception because of a lot of things we're going to talk about.
The probably biggest reason for that is that they're not admissible in court. So why don't you tell us a little bit about the history of polygraphs? Yeah, I feel like it's a storied history in a lot of ways because we do, we see these images on television shows and it's just hard to tell how scientific it is really.
There were really early iterations of this kind of test in the even late 1700s and early 1800s. But the first machine that is similar to what we have today was invented in 1915 by an American psychologist and author, William M.
Marston. And it was basically just like a blood pressure monitoring system that he used to try to determine if someone was deceiving someone else.
And then it was updated in 1921 by a physiologist, John A. Larson, who was also a policeman for the Berkeley, California Police Department.
And his test was a little bit more advanced and very similar, actually, to what we have today. So along with blood pressure, it also measures your breathing and your pulse and your sweat, like how much you're sweating.
And he incorporated into the Berkeley, California Police Department's police interviewing process. And for a time, for a few years, there was a lot of excitement around that because it was seen as this new scientific technology that could prove that someone was either telling a truth or a lie.
And everyone was really excited about it. And in some ways, it was seen as a more humane way to interview suspects because there was a lot of police using violence beating a confession out of someone, if you will.
So this was seen as a more humane way to question someone and get an answer. There was kind of immediately, though, also skeptics who said, well, how scientific is this really? And then the first time it appeared in court was 1923, so two years later, and it appeared in a criminal court case, Fry v.
the United States. James Alfonso Fry was charged with the murder of a prominent doctor in Washington, D.C., Dr.
R.W. Brown, who was shot outside his home in 1920.
Dr. Brown's family offered a $1,000 reward for anyone who could name the shooter.
But for about a year, there were no leads in the case. And then suddenly, this guy in his 20s, James Fry, gets questioned by the police for other crimes, forgery and theft.
And somehow, at the end of that, he ends up confessing to the murder of Dr. Brown.
So he's charged with the murder. The case goes to trial, but then he gets his defense attorneys and he tells them he doesn't have anything to do with the murder, but he had planned to split the reward money with the detective who questioned him.
And he said, that's why he confessed. Yikes.
Who knows? But his attorneys were not in a good place because he had confessed. So they looked around and they found this guy, William Marston, the psychologist, the guy who invented the early version of the polygraph and convinced him to come on.
He gave Fry a polygraph test and, you know, came to the conclusion that he had given a false confession. They tried to submit it as evidence, but ultimately the judge denied that, basically saying that, you know, if scientific technology is going to be used in a court case, it needs to be generally accepted as reliable in the scientific community.
And this was not. And that ends up becoming known as the Frye standard.
So unfortunately, James Frye was convicted of second-degree murder and served 18 years in prison. One thing to note that I thought was interesting about Marston, who's the psychologist that they brought in, he was also an author.
And years later, in 1941, he invented the comic book character Wonder Woman. Okay, jack- all trades.
I know, right? Like, how many things can this guy do? But one of Wonder Woman's magical powers is that she has a golden lasso called the Lasso of Truth. And when she ropes someone with it, they're forced to tell her the truth.
Okay, so call back to the lie detector test. Nice.
Yeah, he's like clearly really interested, as we all are, in this idea if you had an ability to tell for sure that someone was telling you the truth or a lie, it would be so useful. I mean, it's like so much of crime and what we talk about and convictions.
It's like we're trying to get to the truth, and it's a really difficult thing to get to. And for law enforcement, they're so reliant on evidence, as they ought to be.
But, you know, if someone maybe did a good job hiding that evidence, but you could still take a lie detector test and get them on that, that would be case closed for so many investigations. I mean, easy.
Yeah. Wouldn't that be nice? Wouldn't that be nice? You know, in the case that we're going to talk about today, it maybe had some similarities to the James Fry case in that there were no leads for a long time.
And eventually the investigation was picked back up again and a lie detector played a really big role in closing that case. Yeah, which I'm excited to get to that.
One last thing just about, you know, the history of the polygraph. In 1965, there was a U.S.
Committee on Government Operations that did an evaluation of the polygraph machine and concluded, quote, there is no lie detector, neither man nor machine. People have been deceived by a myth that a metal box in the hands of an investigator can detect truth or falsehood.
And then there was another study in 2003 by the U.S. National Research Council, which basically said that the results are better than flipping a coin.
Some critics have said the results are 50-50. It's basically like you're flipping a coin.
This research study basically said that's not true. The accuracy levels are above 50%, more like 60, but still that's...
Not great. There's a lot of room for error.
Not great. And that's something that Mark actually spoke to us a lot about, which we'll get into, which is the very wide spectrum of experts within polygraphing.
So we actually interviewed a retired FBI special agent, Mark Rossi, who was in the FBI for 29 and a half years and had a variety of specialties during that time. He was a profiler, worked on the SWAT team, and then became a federal polygraph examiner.
Mark summarized polygraphs as, it's basically what the body does when the mind realizes you're telling a lie. According to Mark, the polygraph measures are physiological channels such as cardiovascular activity, respiratory activity, and electrodermal activity, which is basically sweat secretion.
One thing that really shocked me, and I think you as well, when we talked to Mark, and he really walked us through the process of what it looks like to give someone a polygraph test.

And he said it can take like four to six hours. So long.
Yeah. There's this whole long process of pre-test where you go through their medical history.
You ask them what medications they might be on and give a full evaluation of their sort of status quo, I guess, is what it would be. He also walks them through the case that he's investigating, as well as goes through every single question that he's going to ask during the polygraph.
So there's no surprises. There's no like gotcha questions in a polygraph.
Right. And the idea is that you're getting a totally objective test.
You know, someone's physiological channels and the changes that are occurring within those are not going to be spiked by a surprise. The idea is that it's just the mind realizing the body is lying.
So we also have to keep in mind, Mark was a profiler as well. So criminal profiler.
So it's like when he's giving the test itself and the results, and he's also evaluating someone the whole time, right? He kind of called out all of those classic tropes of how you could tell someone was telling a lie, like they look down and to the left. And he basically was like, none of that is real.
Because everyone going into a polygraph, probably especially with an expert polygrapher who works for the FBI, no one's relaxed. It's just about being able to get a sense of a person's baseline and then watching for any deviation from that.
When I have to go to the doctor and literally just get my blood pressure taken, I'm nervous. So nervous.

In that scenario.

Oh, yeah.

I went in for a blood draw the other day and he was so nice. He was making small talk with me and I was just like, I have nothing.
I'm nothing. I'm just, if I even breathe, I will run out of here.
I have to just get through this. You and I both would be nervous being polygraphed.
Probably you even more. Probably.
I would fail even if I were innocent. But what did Mark say to us over and over and over about nervousness? Mark said that everybody is nervous.
No one walks into an FBI office, sits down, gets hooked up to a polygraph machine, and is relaxed about it. It's only about measuring the baseline for your nerves, and it's up to the examiner to work out what that baseline is.
Right. And so he said it's fine.
He's tested people who are really nervous and people who are not and claims that he'll still get good results, even with the nerves. Yeah.
And even when he is in the room polygraphing someone, his whole goal is to get a clean chart, I think is how he referred to it. And for him to do that, he has to ask questions in a way that is very straightforward, nothing left up to interpretation, which goes into that pre-test element of a polygraph, where you're saying, when I ask you this question, here's what I mean by it.
Yes. And not using words that might be triggering for people that spike those changes in their baseline.
Yeah, like he talked about going through the pretest with them and making sure that there was no room for interpretation. So it's like, were you at the bank last Friday or something? And, you know, there could be a lot of ways that you interpret that.
Or were you at the bank last Friday morning? And it's like, maybe you were there at 11.45 and you're like, is that morning? Could that be considered afternoon? So he goes through and says, were you at, you know, this specific bank on this corner at this specific time so that there's absolutely no room for you to, as you're thinking about the answer and they're all yes or no questions to be like, well, I don't know. I don't know.
No room for misinterpretation is the goal. And, you know, also in asking the questions, it's a very sort of monotone, unemotional, were you at the bank? Right.
Yeah, I thought it was interesting. He really differentiated between like interrogation or interview and giving a polygraph test.
He said those are completely separate things. And in fact, you cannot interrogate someone prior to giving them the test because it would compromise the validity of the test.
So you have to be, he's just like this calm, collected guy. Or you have to pick one.
Or you have to pick one. Yeah.
So today we're going to talk about a case that Mark told me about while I was on a call with him a while back. I knew we wanted to have him on the show.
And he told me, you know, I'd really love to talk to you about the case of a young woman who went missing. Her name was Echo Mae Wiles.
And Mark's role as an expert polygraph examiner played a major part in the investigation into what happened to Echo. I am retired Special Agent Mark Rozzy from the FBI.
I was an FBI agent for 29 and a half years. I became an FBI polygraph examiner and I held that position in North

Carolina. So I was the only one in this state for the FBI and I held that position for 18 years.

So by the time I retired, I was the senior most FBI polygraph examiner in the country, in the world. So we did a full interview with Mark.
And ultimately, you and I decided we didn't want to use that interview for a full interview episode on the knife, mainly because we had a difficult time finding a lot of information about Echo Wiles as a person. You made some calls, did some outreach.
It was just really difficult to find any information about her. So we didn't feel great about using that interview for a full interview episode because we are really focused on victim stories and victims' rights.
But we found Mark's story really compelling, especially because of the role the polygraph played in solving this case. We're going to walk you through the case of Echo Wiles' disappearance, as well as our conversation with Mark, and we will play a few clips from our interview.
Time is precious, and so are our pets. So time with our pets is extra precious.

That's why we started Dutch.

Dutch provides 24-7 access to licensed vets,

with unlimited virtual visits and follow-ups for up to five pets.

You can message a vet at any time and schedule a video visit the same day.

Our vets can even prescribe medication for many ailments,

and shipping is always free.

With Dutch, you'll get more time with your pets and year-round peace of mind when it comes to their vet care.

Echo Mae Wiles was born on February 8th, 1985. there's not much written about her outside of her disappearance which which you had already mentioned, and that played a role in why we're not going to do the entire interview today.
But Echo was married relatively young at age 20 and was living in Fort Riley, Kansas, which is a military base. Her husband, Joshua Wiles, was a soldier, and he was on active duty.
In August of 2005, Echo disappeared along with her car, and an investigation was launched into what happened. But ultimately, there were few leads, and her disappearance remained a mystery.
Her husband was deployed at the time. I believe he was overseas, and he was not a suspect in this case.
You know, he naturally as a spouse was on a list, but they never had reason to think he was involved in her disappearance or had knowledge of what happened. So, of course, when someone goes missing, there is so much digging that goes into their life to try to figure out who were they associating with and why.
How were they spending their time? Every discoverable detail of someone's life gets dredged up. And in this case, it did come out to investigators that Echo was romantically involved in relationships outside of her marriage.
But with no body, her car was nowhere to be found and, you know, no real motive, no hard evidence.

The case went unsolved for five years.

Well, they didn't even know that it was a crime at that point.

Right. She was just gone.

And the lead investigator on that case who worked for the Army actually retired in that time that her case was going unsolved with no additional leads. It's got to feel so bad to retire with unsolved cases.
That would be really hard because, you know, what we came to learn from Mark is she worked incredibly hard on this case to try to bring closure to Echo's family to try to find her. Yeah, they did extensive work in the beginning interviewing people who knew Echo were associated with Echo, but she was just gone.
And the first break in the case came just by chance. It was in April of 2010.
Construction workers were draining a body of water called Moon Lake, which is on Fort Riley. And as the water lowered, they could see a car antenna emerging.
Oh my gosh. I know.
And the car was in 1997, Chevrolet Monte Carlo, and that is the kind of car that Echo Wiles was driving. Of course, they have to do their due diligence and make sure, but the car did belong to Echo, and tragically, her remains were found inside of the vehicle.
So she'd been there the whole time. She'd been there the entire time.
You know, at that point, the investigation is reignited because now they have remains, and it's still not clear what happened. They just have her remains in her car.
But with evidence they could examine for the first time in the case, they actually brought back that retired Army investigator to come back to work on it. And the remains were not in a state where even a medical examiner could determine the cause of death.
Oh, wow. So you have remains now, but you have no way of knowing how she died.
Right. But because of the remains being in the car, they now had reason to suspect foul play.

And that's when they call Mark. Mark was brought in to assist the Army on this case because he's an expert polygrapher.
And one thing that Mark explained to us is that polygraph is an incredible tool for ruling people out as much as it is finding someone who's guilty of a crime and trying to be deceptive about it. When he told us that, one of the points he made was that there's resources that have to go into investigating all the people of interest in a case, right? So if you can rule someone out, then you're saving resources, money, personnel, as well as a person who is innocent having to have, like, their phone records reviewed, etc.
Right, and time. Because, you know, if you believe that there is foul play, you're trying to get to the person who's responsible.
Yeah. So Mark was called in and he said, yes, absolutely, he would assist.
And the first person that he was asked to polygraph was a man that Echo was known to have had a romantic relationship with. And this person was actually still on active duty but had since been relocated to Fort Bragg in North Carolina.
And Mark hit a speed bump as soon as he arrived. He said when he got there, they introduced him to this person, and he was under the impression that this person would be unaware he was coming.
And, you know, we've spoken a lot about how there's no surprises with polygraphs, but in this specific situation and maybe other situations like this, the idea is that Mark then has an opportunity to introduce himself and let this person know how highly trained he is because polygraphs are voluntary. So, you know, there's nothing stopping someone from saying, nope, not interested

in walking away. Yeah.
And it's also a point of information gathering, right? Like the first time someone hears the question of, will you take a polygraph in this case? He's reading their reaction. Are they shocked? Like usually yes, but are they sort of like, okay, why would I? Or are they super resistant? It's all potential information that could help inform his profiling, basically, of the person.
Right. And that is the idea as he walks in and he has an opportunity to say, my name is Special Agent Mark Rossi and here's all of my accreditations and experience and here's why you should take this test.
But an attorney who worked for the Army because the soldier was still on active duty advised his client, do not take this polygraph. And so Mark is immediately like, okay, I need to find a way to make this happen.
And we're going to play a clip for you from Mark telling us about that moment. And I said, I'm going to have multiple people I need need to polygraph and I'm here to clear your good name as long as you didn't, you know, kill Echo.
And the look in his eyes, he kind of looked at me like, you know, you think I killed Echo? It just had that ring to it. And I said, oh, do you think I'm here because of the affair you had with her? I said, I don't care about that.
I said, I'm just here to, you know, to make sure that you didn't kill her. And he looked at me and I said, but if we can't clear you with a polygraph, they'll just keep digging into your past and going through your records.
But that's your right. And he said, wait, wait a minute.
He said, listen, on second thought, I'd like to take a polygraph. Mark got him.
He got him. Mark got him to take a polygraph.
A couple of things. In the military, having an affair with a married person is a punishable offense.
And this man that Mark had been asked to polygraph was still on active duty. So whether or not he had anything to do with Echo's disappearance or any knowledge of what happened to her, by admitting that he had this romantic relationship, he could potentially still face those consequences.
So Mark knew this might be concerning for him and just had to reassure him, I'm not here because of the affair. He was there because Echo's body was in that car.
Although, when we asked Mark, did you tell them that Echo's remains were found or in the car? And he couldn't recall exactly what this first polygraph that we're going to talk about, but he said that because it had been published, he suspected that the person knew why he was there because he was concerned about the affair. Right.
So it was public knowledge at that point that Echo's remains had been found. Right.
Gotcha. So they go ahead and do the polygraph, which again consists of a lengthy pretest, the polygraph itself, and the post-test.
And, you know, these are a series of yes or no answers. They're all questions asked multiple times.
And Mark is doing all of this to see if he can get a quote-unquote clean test. Time is precious, and so are our pets.
So time with our pets is extra precious. That's why we started Dutch.
Dutch provides 24-7 access to licensed vets, with unlimited virtual visits and follow-ups for up to five pets. You can message a vet at any time and schedule a video visit the same day.
Our vets can even prescribe medication for many ailments and shipping is always free. With Dutch, you'll get more time with your pets and year-round peace of mind when it comes to their vet care.
And so Mark told us that he was able to get a very clean test, and it was clear to him in the room that this guy had passed with flying colors, is what he said. He talked about there being a process of he can't really tell you in the room, but he knew, and then it was quickly confirmed by his associates that this guy passed the polygraph.
This was not the person who killed Echo. I imagine that was a moment of extreme relief for this person.
You gotta think so. You gotta think so.
So Mark returns home and he communicates these results to the Army investigator. And, you know, Mark said that in his 18 years of polygraphing, he ran somewhere between 3,000 and 3,500 polygraphs.
He knows what a past polygraph test looks like. But as you mentioned, he can't say that in the room.
And that's all just part of this very strict process the FBI has where an outside source has to look at it. So that they're going off only this chart and not a lingering suspicion.
So then eventually he gets another call, and it's from that same lead investigator on the case that's with the military. And she tells him that there is a second person of interest in the case named Christopher Willoughby and asks if he is willing to go and do another polygraph.
By this time, it's December of 2010, about seven months after Echo's remains were discovered, still five years after she went missing. Right.
A little over five years after Echo had initially gone missing. And at this time, Chris Willoughby is in his mid-20s and no longer active in the military.
So we have another clip from Mark talking about that call, requesting a second polygraph. So on the second polygraph, quite frankly, I was given a very similar story.
We found another soldier, former soldier, who is a civilian now, that when he left Fort Raleigh, Kansas, I don't know his

direct path, but ultimately settled down as a civilian in the Pensacola area. And we believe that he may have had an ongoing affair at the time of Echo's disappearance with Echo.
And would I be willing to also give him a polygraph? so mark travels to flor to meet Chris Willoughby in person. And just like in the scenario of the first polygraph, Mark introduces himself, speaks with Chris about his experience and asks Chris, are you willing to take a polygraph? You know, Chris had also been known to be a romantic associate of Echoes, and that was no longer a concern for Chris like it was in the case of the first soldier because at this point, Chris is a civilian.
Right. So he doesn't face any consequences for this extramarital relationship.
Yeah, but he still agrees to do the polygraph. And not all polygraphs are recorded with video, but this one was because it was an investigation run by the military, and that was the military's process.
I don't know if it always is, but for this case, it was. So they were in a room, you know, same with this first polygraph.
Everything was captured on video. Right, and that was not FBI process at the time.
So that was just completely set up by the Army. Mark was going to go in and do the polygraph either way.
Let's get into the clip.

So a lot of background is being done, and in this case, between Chris and I, and then we start reviewing the case. You can't give a polygraph without talking about the case.
And we did.

We spent some time talking about the case.

And somewhere in this, we refer to as the pre-test, the pre-polygraph examination, the pre-test interview.

In order to give a fair unbiased polygraph, it's just a discussion. I'm asking them some questions.
I'm answering any questions they have with me. But somewhere in that pre-test interview, Chris Willoughby turned to me and out of nowhere, and it wasn't in response to anything I asked him.
And he said, he let out a little phrase, something like this. I can still smell her perfume.
Yeah. You know, talking to Mark, a lot of years have passed since he's polygraphed and we asked him a lot of specific questions as we we typically do.
And, you know, Mark always was like, oh, I can't quite recall, or maybe

around this time. He remembered that comment from Chris so clearly.

Yeah. I mean, it's such a bizarre comment that it was an immediate red flag to him.

Right, because he's got this whole career as an FBI agent, a criminal profiler. He knows.

Yeah, it's not just like... that it was an immediate red flag to him.
Right, because he's got this whole career as an FBI agent, a criminal profiler.

He knows.

Yeah, it's not just like a flippant comment that someone would say seemingly for no reason. Yeah, and so, you know, it'd been five years at this point since Echo had disappeared.

So to recall her perfume and also, you know, I wasn't there and I'm speculating, I guess, but you're speaking with an FBI agent and that slips out. Just an astonishing moment for Mark.
But his training, Mark's training, has brought him to this place of being able to appear totally neutral, even if he's majorly flagging something like a very strange comment. He can be internally shocked, but he doesn't show that on his face at all because he wants whoever he's talking to to give him as much information as possible to be very comfortable and see him almost like a friend that he can talk to.
Right. Someone who's only there to conduct a polygraph and not there to determine guilt.
Right. Not there to get the

guilt out of someone, but to just get the truth. So Mark flags this comment, super unsettling,

and he briefly contemplates abandoning the polygraph and going into an interrogation because

To try to get a confession. To try to get a confession.
But, you know, there comes another

point in this pretest where that decision ends up being made for him. And we're going to play that clip from Mark.
I'm going to be honest with you. There comes a point, at least for me, but I know in speaking to all these other FBI polygraph examiners and other polygraph examiners, where you have to decide, are we even giving a polygraph today? Because there's nothing to prevent you from just going into an interrogation.
But once you start an interrogation, you're done. There is no polygraph.
In other words, you can't go after someone and say, hey, listen, I've got reason to believe you did this thing and we need to dig deeper and then come back and say, okay, now I'm going to give you a fair unbiased pilot. You can't do that.
So my brain is going, do I go for it now? Because I think he did it. Do I go for it now? But Mark said that right as he was thinking that, Chris turned to him and asked if they could go outside and have a cigarette.
Mark doesn't smoke, but he was like, great. So they go outside.
And he said that Chris was chain smoking and pacing around the parking lot really quickly. Mark was like, you know, worked on the SWAT team for years, but was like, you know, rushing to keep up with him.
And he's thinking, okay, maybe this is another sign I should go for an interrogation. But then Chris finishes his cigarette, goes back inside and says, okay, I'm ready for my polygraph.
And so Mark thought, all right, well, he asked for it. He wants to do the polygraph.
Let's just do it. Let's do it and see how this goes.
So Mark proceeds. And here's a clip where Mark talks a little bit more about the process and specifically with Chris, who had already sort of given him a few maybe warning signals.
You can't ask about a murder, but you can ask about, when you don't have any remains, did you directly cause the disappearance? Or when you have remains, did you cause her to either disappear? Did you cause anything to do with the lake, anything to do with the car, the more specific, the better based on how much, you know, and that way, again, their mind doesn't have wiggle room. So again, exactly what the phraseology was with him, but the bottom line was, it was a, you know, in there, in that set of questions is a, did you do it? And as I'm watching it come across, it's not funny, ha ha, but when you're giving them

and you know you've got to run three or four times and the first time you run it, you look up and your brain goes, again, excuse my language, oh shit, he killed her. And you're saying, okay, and now we're going to take a break and get ready to run it again.
So they run it again and again. and Mark goes through these very pointed yes or no questions, and eventually they come to a place where Mark's been watching his body language, but mostly Mark is watching his charts.
And they come to the end of the polygraph, and Mark sees indications of deception. Mark makes a decision during the post-test to just level with Chris Willoughby and tell him, you know, I have to send these back to the office for an outside person to make the final determination on the test, but I think that you have failed.
And this is the post-test. So anything in the actual polygraph is not admissible in court, but the pre-test and the post-test are.
And so here is this next clip, Mark explaining exactly what happened next. I let him know we're done with the test.
I take the equipment off and then we go into our post-test setup. It's time to see if he's willing to tell you what he's done.
So that's where the conversation begins. And basically, at some point, you got to stop with, you know, are you sure you didn't do? I know it's a I've reviewed my charts and I know what I'm looking at.

And Chris, I wasn't there, but you were. And you need to tell me what happened that day.
So I don't remember exactly how Chris's went. The bottom line is when I told him that he had failed his polygraph.
And again, to be honest, I don't remember exactly how it happened. but at some point he just looks up and says,

I'm going to tell you what happened.

Wow.

And it's important to remember they're still recording.

And just outside the room, that Army investigator is watching this all happen. Who has been working on this case before she retired, then a few years of retirement, back on the case.
And really, they had a few persons of interest, but no DNA evidence, no real leads. And now Mark is sitting here across from this guy who's saying, I'm going to tell you what happened.
And Mark knows that he has details not released to the press that covered the discovery of Echo's remains. And so he's now going into the mode of, okay, so he's going to tell me what happened.
And I have details that only people working on the investigation or someone who was there and involved would know. To make sure that it's not a false confession.

It's not a false confession.

There's no way to back out of it if you have that information.

So Mark proceeds.

But what he tells me what happens is this.

He knew Echo to be pregnant with his children, with Chris's children, twins, actually, and that he loved her so much that he had approached her and begged her to run away with him. and not stay with her husband, who was, again, overseas at the point of this conversation that took place years prior.
And he tells me, I wouldn't have any other way of knowing, he tells me that she tells him that the husband had been home for a home visit that wouldn't have made it impossible that the husband impregnated her. And so Echo tells Chris, this is all per Chris.
This is the only place I got it from. Echo tells Chris, I'm going with that story.
He's to never know about you. He's to never know you're the father of the children.
Because no, I'm not going to run away with you. I'm going to carry on with my husband when he comes back, et cetera.
So she says, I'm going to have these kids and say that they're my husband. Yes.
And this all takes place either the day prior or the day that Chris Willoughby is exiting the military. His time of service is up.
Coincidentally? Well, I don't know coincidentally. I'm just saying it comes to a head.
I see. Okay.
In other words, hey, I'm leaving base. I want you to leave with me.
You're going to have our children and you're going to let your husband know you're leaving him and you're coming with me. And this is what I'm getting from Chris.

Now, the investigator backed up the fact that they had medical records to show she was pregnant,

that she'd been visiting a doctor, things like that.

But the very specifics of what Chris said, we didn't know because all you have are skeletal

remains.

So it's not like we had a DNA test available to show us they had to be his children. Chris is telling me they're his children.
And apparently what happens is it comes to a head per Chris. And when he says, you're coming with me, and she says, no, I'm not, he went into graphic details with me.
He said, you know, I remember putting my hands around her neck and around her throat and just squeezing. You know, I can't imagine being in Mark's position in that moment and just keeping a straight face and a calm demeanor, it's the work that you're doing.

So in a sense, you're relieved that you've now got a confession from someone that lines up with what you know to be true about the remains.

Because Chris revealed to Mark that he seatbelted Echo's body into the backseat when he pushed her car into the lake. And that was really the piece that solidified Chris Willoughby's confession as being truthful to the investigators.
Because it's so unusual. You would think that if someone drove into a lake, obviously they'd be in the driver's seat.
She was in the back seat, seat belted in. Yeah, certainly not seat belted in in the back seat.
I mean, the remains were still seat belted in when they found the car. And so no one outside of anyone who had been working on the case knew that information.
So in this particular instance, a polygraph led to a murder confession and Chris Willoughby was arrested. He had federal charges first and then eventually for the murder of Echo Wiles.

Chris was federally charged with concealing the body of Echo Mae Wiles in the car and sinking the car, failing to report the theft of Wiles' car to authorities, stealing her car, obtaining control of Echo Wiles' dead body, entering a military installation for unlawful purpose. And then the state filed their own charge, murder in the second degree.
And Chris was sentenced on July 21st, 2011. But we actually found something very surprising to both of us when we looked into it.
Yeah, Chris was actually released in 2022. According to the Kansas Criminal Justice Information System, which we were able to access online, Chris Willoughby's status changed to in-state post-release on May 20th, 2022, and then changed again on May 24th, 2022, to sentence expired.
So he is out, and it feels like not enough time for having killed someone. You know, I don't know if this goes into the fact that Echo really didn't have a lot of family and a lot of people to sort of speak out for her.
One of the things that Mark told us was that that lead investigator, she was so thrilled that this was solved for the few people in Echo's lives that were wondering, you know, but Echo didn't come from a lot of means. And so that investigator actually like raised money to bury Echo's remains.
And I'm so glad that this case was solved. It's horrible how she died.
You know, it's horrible even the way that he described that he like loved her so much and was so possessive and then he killed her. Like, that's not okay.
That's really screwed up. Even though she didn't have a lot of family, her life still mattered.
And I'm glad that they were able to solve the case. And I don't know why he didn't serve his whole time.
Yeah. So hard to understand how someone could feel that level of entitlement to another human being.
And it's hard to comprehend someone out there living their life really only a little over 10 years of serving time. So we also asked Mark a lot of other questions we had about polygraphs.
And, you know, Hannah, you had read a book recently about sociopaths. I'm obsessed with sociopaths.
Hannah's obsessed with sociopaths. What did you learn? So I asked Mark, how would a sociopath do if they were given a polygraph test? My thinking was maybe they could pass it more easily.
But he actually said that in his opinion, you know, he's done a lot of tests that he found that sociopaths and psychopaths were easier to test in some ways. Even though they maybe don't get nervous, he said it's really about memory recall.
He said that if he's asking about a specific incident about, you know, robbing a bank, for example, well, he said sociopaths have great memories. And oftentimes in his experience, when he would interview someone or give someone a polygraph test,

a sociopath, they would maybe have thought about it a lot, almost like a victory, like revel in

that, right? And so the recall is so crystal clear. If he says, did you rob this bank? He's like,

even if it's just such a quick flash through your mind, you see the scared teller's eyes. You see

I don't know. crystal clear.
If he says, did you rob this bank? He's like, even if it's just such a quick flash through your mind, you see the scared teller's eyes. You see them handing you the money.
You know, all of it is so clear and that will be reflected in your physiological responses. And he basically said he could give almost anyone a polygraph test.
Because it actually calls right back to his initial Reader's Digest explanation of polygraphing, which is the mind detecting when the body is lying. And so if you're a sociopath with all of this visual imagery happening in your mind as you're being asked the question, you're watching that all play out and your body is telling a different story.
Yeah. It still doesn't quite make sense to me because I don't think that sociopaths care that they're telling a lie, but maybe there's still some kind of physiological response.
Yeah. The question of how a sociopath could ever be, I think Mark referred to sociopaths as the easiest people.
Yeah, he did. To give lie detector tests.
His preference. His preference, his sociopaths.
Yeah, because of their recall of these situations and that being helpful to him. But yeah, it's surprising.
I quickly did want to say, you know, just because we're talking about polygraphs, there have been instances of people in the past who have successfully tricked a polygraph test, guilty people who passed them, as well as innocent people who did not pass them. So we're not here advocating that polygraphs are perfect or that they should be admissible in court.
I think there's a really good reason why they're not. And that's something Mark agreed with when we were speaking with him.
He was like, polygraphs are not perfect. It makes total sense that these are not admissible.
Yeah, but they can be a useful tool for an investigator. Well, you know, it's a tragic story, but it's amazing that Mark was able to help bring closure to this case for Echo's family.
And I did reach out to Chris Willoughby as well, since we're mentioning him, and did not hear it back. I am really glad to have learned about the case of Echo Wiles.
And I feel like I also learned a lot about the polygraph test this week. If you have any opinions about polygraph tests or specific stories in your life that relates to it or questions about it, send them in.
We'd love to hear from you. Thanks for listening.
We'll be back next week. If you have a story for us, we would love to hear it.
Our email is thenife at exactlyrightmedia.com or you can follow us on Instagram at the knife podcast or blue sky at the knife podcast. This has been an Exactly Right production hosted and produced by me, Hannah Smith.
And me, Pasha Eaton.

Our producers are Tom Breifogle and Alexa Samorosi.

This episode was mixed by Tom Breifogle.

Our associate producer is Christina Chamberlain.

Our theme music is by Birds in the Airport.

Artwork by Vanessa Lilac.